Myer
customers who bought Ellery-branded products spent more throughout the store compared with customers who bought other high-end Australian designers, the Victorian Supreme Court was told on Tuesday.

Giving evidence in the dispute between the department store chain and young fashion designer
Kym Ellery
over an arrangement with
David Jones
, Myer executive general manager merchandise,
Adam Stapleton,
said customers who spent $400 on Ellery clothing in a year would spend more than $4000 in store on other products.

This compared with about $3000 spent in store by purchasers of other exclusively stocked Australian designers. Mr Stapleton was able to show the correlation after analysing data from Myer’s loyalty card program.

Myer is seeking damages against Ms Ellery for breach of contract and failing to deliver an order for the autumn-winter 2013 collection. It is also seeking an injunction preventing Ms Ellery from supplying either of her two brands, Ellery or L’America, to David Jones.

Myer has said that having a stable of exclusively stocked designers was crucial to competing with its rival.

Also giving evidence in Melbourne, former Myer merchandise executive
Judy Coomber
, who joined competitor Premier Investments last December, told the court Myer invested more in events and marketing campaigns promoting designers than it made in gross profits on sales by those suppliers. “We [Myer] generally do not make enormous gross profit dollars [from the Australian designers]," she said.

Appearing for Ms Ellery,
David Shavin
, QC, asked Ms Coomber if the benefit that Myer received from a connection with the designers was greater than the gross profit it derived. Ms Coomber said that was correct, but said the benefit of Myer’s marketing and public relations efforts was “as equally compelling as the sales and incomes" for the designers as well.

Ms Coomber said she felt “personally betrayed" when she found out that a brand linked to Ms Ellery, L’America, was to be stocked in David Jones.

Related Quotes

Company Profile

Myer has claimed breach of an exclusivity contract on the grounds the L’America range is a diffusion range – a more affordable offshoot to a high-end brand – but Ms Ellery disputes that.

“I had done a lot to try and help Kym," Ms Coomber said.

After realising that her business was in financial difficulty in October, 2011, Ms Ellery approached Ms Coomber with a small collection in an attempt to increase sales at Myer.

This approach, as well as a shoe range, was turned down by Myer. Ms Coomber told the court she had suggested gaps in Myer’s offering that Ms Ellery could fill, such as a range for a mature market that was suitable for work but still on trend.

“But clearly she’s not interested in that segment," Ms Coomber said.

Mr Stapleton, who took over from Ms Coomber, told the court that until January 8, when he became aware that Ms Ellery had signed an exclusive agreement to supply David Jones, he thought there was a chance that Ellery could remain with Myer under an exclusive agreement. The hearing continues on Wednesday.

“I absolutely thought everything was retrievable and we could continue doing business," said Mr Stapleton. But the court has heard that the relationship was already in disarray by that time.